I have often thought that a Black Op address book of sorts for quests that wish to be contacted by listeners by voluntarily provided e-mail addresses would increase the networking of interested parties.

Damn I am old enough now to say... In the old days when those of us investigating this ran into one another we often pulled out address books and exchanged our and in some cases others telephone numbers and postal addresses so we could write a letter , exchange photos , monographs , articles , and even extra books.

wow ... Am I an F___ing dinosaur ???....

Baseball Cards cost 15 cents when I was collecting them ..... OMG .... I am a dinosaur ... LOL

I would like to see a bit more activity here. This seems to be the backwater of conspiracy forums, though you don't see much of the usual cast of Oswald-did-it loonies, which is a good thing.

Me too! How do we get more activity? Nobody seems to like this forum. For awhile, I thought it was the forum software, but I've tried changing that, and it doesn't seem to make a difference. Maybe it's just me. :(

The new board software is an improvement. But it still seems kind of odd -- unlike any other board I have been on. For example, unless you know better, the default position for any post is 'Ask a question'.

Over on the Coogan thread, for example, after posting a message, a few lines show up strangely highlighted. I didn't add the highlighting.

When I go back and try to edit, by selecting the text and clicking 'Remove Formatting' in order to set it to Arial size 2 again, I somehow end up with an extra 2000-odd characters to the post. I can't post the edit because it's now all of the sudden past the size limit.

I assume something is going on with the HTML with that, since there are no visible characters added in the post composition window. Maybe the HTML is counted toward the total character count?

Weird things happen during the composition process. Also, the box is a bit too small if you're writing a post of more than a few lines. And the maximum post length could be increased.

Hi Zach, I've wanted to tell you this about the forum for a while. I liked the way the last forum was set up. It was easier for my eyes to pick up the various subjects. Also, are all of the past forums available to read? Thanks & please keep up the good work. Bob

Hi Zach, I've wanted to tell you this about the forum for a while. I liked the way the last forum was set up. It was easier for my eyes to pick up the various subjects. Also, are all of the past forums available to read? Thanks & please keep up the good work. Bob

Robert1, you can't go back and look at the old one, but all the posts from it have been imported into this one. We might try changing the theme or something to make it easier on the eyes. I'm using this super plain theme to make it easier for Len to embed it in the BoR website.

I'm pretty new to the JFK assassination (been reading about it and following it for about 2 years) and honestly the whole thing is overwhelming. There is such a huge cast of characters and so many whacky theories out there that I would almost like to see a section like a "new users guide" with a list of people that have been thought to have been implicated and what some of the theories are regarding said individual and what the "current status" of the general opinion is of said character (I hope that makes sense). For instance, I read that George Bush was involved in some theories and the way it was laid out made sense to me then I heard that it was false....I still don't know to tell you the truth and I guess some kind of "one stop shopping" would be nice.

there are just so many people and so many things out there that it is overwhelming, the Q&A with Jim D on the podcast is great but sometimes he'll mention someone in passing and it's just another name for me to look into sometime, this is a case where it seems to me alot of information has been put out there to confuse people-to get them to take thier eye off of wha tthey should be looking at so to speak....it's incredible.

Well, from what I gather from DiEugenio, the overall plot was organized by Alan Dulles, former head of the CIA fired by JFK and the guy who pretty much ran the Warren Commission. The operation, again as I understand it from DiEugenio, was run on the ground by Ed Lansdale, at the time recently retired from the air force/CIA and photographed in Dealey Plaza. Lansdale ran political assassinations in foreign countries, including an uncanny ability to blame it on the locals, so he was the ideal man for the job. The folks doing the shooting were various former CIA operatives including Mafia and Cuban exile resources. Everyone else was a bit player.

Stay away from Jim Fetzer. He sees a conspiracy under every bed and has a hard time distinguishing between reality and his own fantasies.

As for Harvey Oswald (see my posting on the two Oswalds), he was a patsy and had nothing to do with the assassination, functioning as a classic Lansdale cover story. He was on the 2nd floor of the depository drinking a coke. Lee Oswald, on the other hand, may actually have been involved, having been seen among the Cuban exiles while Harvey was in Russia, a situation known to J Edgar Hoover. As far as anyone can tell, Lee is still alive, though the agency might very well have disposed of him long ago as an unacceptable risk.

This case is, obviously, a classical example of not being able to see the forest for the trees. Folks tend to run off on book-length tangents that just serve to confuse the reader. That's the great thing about John Armstrong. He just gives the facts and lets you draw your own conclusions.